Unions warn of train strike as staff demand pay increase

Colonel Claptrap

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/former-union-boss-brendan-ogle-to-launch-political-party-1.3440018?mode=amp

Brendan Ogle to set up a political party.

L1011

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/former-union-boss-brendan-ogle-to-launch-political-party-1.3440018?mode=amp

Brendan Ogle to set up a political party.

Because spreading the limited % that the hard left get has worked so well before.


DLR in London is not operating due to a strike today despite being driverless - despite the constant claims on here that the only reason anyone would go driverless is to avoid strikes!

A reduction of the working week could resolve the training issues. Interesting :pac:
https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/reduction-of-working-week-could-help-to-avoid-rail-strike-834689.html

gooddarts10

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

A reduction of the working week could resolve the training issues. Interesting :pac:
https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/reduction-of-working-week-could-help-to-avoid-rail-strike-834689.html

As far as I’m aware even if the drivers agree to the talks on the shorter working week mentoring will still be voluntary thus changing nothing.

devnull

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

A reduction of the working week could resolve the training issues. Interesting :pac:
https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/reduction-of-working-week-could-help-to-avoid-rail-strike-834689.html

So this dispute is actually about the fact that new drivers will impact the ability of existing drivers to earn overtime, which the existing drivers want to offset by reducing the working week?

gooddarts10

devnull wrote: »

So this dispute is actually about the fact that new drivers will impact the ability of existing drivers to earn overtime, which the existing drivers want to offset by reducing the working week?

I have no problem with the drivers trying to better their t&cs but it shouldn’t be on the back of fellow union members

Jamie2k9

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

A reduction of the working week could resolve the training issues. Interesting :pac:
https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/reduction-of-working-week-could-help-to-avoid-rail-strike-834689.html

A shorter working week means more drivers will be required to facilitate it so if you want a shorter week you train the new drivers to make it happen

So this dispute is actually about the fact that new drivers will impact the ability of existing drivers to earn overtime, which the existing drivers want to offset by reducing the working week?

You would think that but the reality is those drivers doing overtime will be worse off regardless of a shorter week. They get a premium for it and expenses as well.

Is there split ranks on the shorter week verses overtime??

As far as I’m aware even if the drivers agree to the talks on the shorter working week mentoring will still be voluntary thus changing nothing.

IE will want assurance there will be drivers available to train regardless of it been voluntary. They won't agree to a reduced week until the training is resolved.

Jamie2k9

it has been revealed that the company has agreed to talks on the possibility of reducing their working week if they agree to drive more hours and carry out the training.

The message to members claimed the recently departed chief executive David Franks was the "main protagonist in resisting our agenda to improve drivers' terms and conditions".

"But, that was then, this is now," it said. "We have today receiveda commitment from Iarnród Éireann senior management team that they will enter immediate discussions on a reduction in the working week within a dedicated timeframe of three months."

The message said they faced a choice - they must accept the mentoring deal and begin talks on the working week or "be prepared to engage in an all-out strike if or when Iarnród Éireann moves to unilaterally impose the mentoring regime".

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/rail-staff-offered-cut-to-working-week-to-avert-strike-36751461.html

Personally, it might work but I don't think senior management should be putting such offers on the table.

devnull

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/rail-staff-offered-cut-to-working-week-to-avert-strike-36751461.html

Personally, it might work but I don't think senior management should be putting such offers on the table.

As I suspected - all about making sure that current staff do not lose pay from new drivers reducing the ability for existing drivers to earn cash by working overtime.

They're happy to reduce their overtime earning potential by training new drivers, as long as they have some of their current standard hours chucked over from the contracted hours basket to overtime hours basket.

Apparently this was all about mentoring but in reality it's becoming clear it's about not losing the gravy train of the same overtime culture in Irish Rail, that exists in Bus Eireann.

Jamie2k9

It depends, if staff are driving more /in the short week it could enable savings get made. I'm informed typical weekly driving is 20-26 hours so IE would really get that over 30. Then there is extra DART, Maynooth services planning so extra staff will still likely leave some overtime available.

The big point is that IE would have a guarantee of driver training to take place either through voluntary or compulsory means so can control the overtime bill. I reckon they won't totally eliminate because they can benefit from it as well.

gooddarts10

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It depends, if staff are driving more /in the short week it could enable savings get made. I'm informed typical weekly driving is 20-26 hours so IE would really get that over 30. Then there is extra DART, Maynooth services planning so extra staff will still likely leave some overtime available.

The big point is that IE would have a guarantee of driver training to take place either through voluntary or compulsory means so can control the overtime bill. I reckon they won't totally eliminate because they can benefit from it as well.

Latest ballot has been passed by both unions

Jamie2k9

gooddarts10 wrote: »

Latest ballot has been passed by both unions

Any % info?

Will the Labour Court still issue is recommendation?

gooddarts10

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Any % info?

Will the Labour Court still issue is recommendation?

Nbru 59% in favour Siptu 60% in favour

Infini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/rail-staff-offered-cut-to-working-week-to-avert-strike-36751461.html

Personally, it might work but I don't think senior management should be putting such offers on the table.

To be honest it's progress. Frank's as well also alienated people with his management style to the point that everything ended up deadlocked. Shouldn't be a suprise that there's some movement now that he's gone for good.

alentejo

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/irish-rail-curtailed-key-engineering-work-to-fund-pay-rise-1.3466262

Cookie_Monster

alentejo wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/irish-rail-curtailed-key-engineering-work-to-fund-pay-rise-1.3466262

deferring maintenance to fund pay rises is, frankly, insane.

eeguy

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

deferring maintenance to fund pay rises is, frankly, insane.

Just try not be on the train when another bridge collapses.

Jamie2k9

Infini wrote: »

To be honest it's progress. Frank's as well also alienated people with his management style to the point that everything ended up deadlocked. Shouldn't be a suprise that there's some movement now that he's gone for good.

Well others might call it blatant blackmail

Given the tight result I suspect there will still be a lot of angry DART drivers in Fairview...

As for Frank's management style while I wasn't a fan I don't think it would take much to alienate the workforce.

jimmycrackcorm

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

As for Frank's management style while I wasn't a fan I don't think it would take much to alienate the workforce.

His management style is only effective in private industry. in the public transport monopoly where union blackmail rules supreme, you just have to pay the ransom.

devnull

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

deferring maintenance to fund pay rises is, frankly, insane.

By essential maintenance work, what do they mean, as opposed to non essential maintenance work? Does anyone have any examples of the kind of work that has been postponed and the consequences of that?

On the face of it though, it seems very much another example of a public service not being run on behalf of the public and instead the needs of the staff are deemed more important.

Hilly Bill

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

deferring maintenance to fund pay rises is, frankly, insane.

That's just spin, they wouldn't defer essential maintenance for anything.

Hilly Bill

devnull wrote: »

By essential maintenance work, what do they mean, as opposed to non essential maintenance work? Does anyone have any examples of the kind of work that has been postponed and the consequences of that?

On the face of it though, it seems very much another example of a public service not being run on behalf of the public and instead the needs of the staff are deemed more important.

Ballast cleaning..

goingnowhere

Hilly Bill wrote: »

That's just spin, they wouldn't defer essential maintenance for anything.

Yes you would as you just slap a speed restriction in

Jamie2k9

Hilly Bill wrote: »

That's just spin, they wouldn't defer essential maintenance for anything.

It would be true and it has happened a few times with speed restrictions as said however I wouldn't fully believe the claim either. They need more money so they are been tactical here but I am not surprised those inside would question/dismiss such a claim even if it was accurate.

Hilly Bill

goingnowhere wrote: »

Yes you would as you just slap a speed restriction in

Then it wouldn't be essential then would it.

Hilly Bill

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It would be true and it has happened a few times with speed restrictions as said however I wouldn't fully believe the claim either. They need more money so they are been tactical here but I am not surprised those inside would question/dismiss such a claim even if it was accurate.

Deffered the works yes but its not essential.

eeguy

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Then it wouldn't be essential then would it.

Sure you could stop the trains altogether, then there's be no maintenance required at all.

Jamie2k9

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Deffered the works yes but its not essential.

Depends on your view, I mean is a TSR acceptable to be in place for 12, 18 or 24 months because works are required on the network. In my view its not.

Having to slow down trains is essential, it is just them delaying it as long as possible. Routine maintenance can easily be deferred without slowing trains for a period of time.

You know there is a problem when TSRs are no longer listed in weekly circulars but make permanent on a route....

The high pay rise granted was inevitably going defer infrastructure spend because the NTA were never going to cough up all the money nor should they have to.

Hilly Bill

They have deffered works in the past for various reasons, it's no biggy. It's still going to get done and a dispute is resolved so happy days all around.

Cookie_Monster

Hilly Bill wrote: »

That's just spin, they wouldn't defer essential maintenance for anything.

sure, I'll believe you over IE and a paper of record...
take your spin elsewhere

Jamie2k9

Hilly Bill wrote: »

They have deffered works in the past for various reasons, it's no biggy. It's still going to get done and a dispute is resolved so happy days all around.

Over for now, once the 3 months runs out and unions don't get what they want they will dangle the strike threats again!

Hilly Bill

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Over for now, once the 3 months runs out and unions don't get what they want they will dangle the strike threats again!

And rightly so.

gooddarts10

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Over for now, once the 3 months runs out and unions don't get what they want they will dangle the strike threats again!

Not over yet !! I hear that the Dart drivers ( the problem child of Irish rail ) have thrown there rattle out of the pram and are NOT going to make themselves available for mentoring

Jamie2k9

gooddarts10 wrote: »

Not over yet !! I hear that the Dart drivers ( the problem child of Irish rail ) have thrown there rattle out of the pram and are NOT going to make themselves available for mentoring

Well I cant say I am surprised but still it will be a sticky situation for unions to wriggle their way out of because they set the question and made the result binding!

Hilly Bill wrote: »

And rightly so.

Could you change sides any more often

gooddarts10

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Well I cant say I am surprised but still it will be a sticky situation for unions to wriggle their way out of because they set the question and made the result binding!



Could you change sides any more often

The unions can’t back them as the vote as you say is binding but unfortunately it looks like a few rabble rousers within the Dart drivers are calling the shots

Jamie2k9

gooddarts10 wrote: »

The unions can’t back them as the vote as you say is binding but unfortunately it looks like a few rabble rousers within the Dart drivers are calling the shots

Given they are confined to EMU I suspect what IE offered is much less appealing as IE probally have adequate staffing resources on the DART. I mean service levels are down but have been more less the same for the last 10 years. Apart from extra training for this 10 minute services resources are probally rarely stretched.

If IE play it well they could even manage to get compulsory training passed, most have a price so anything is possible but suspect I might be to optimistic!

GM228

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

If IE play it well they could even manage to get compulsory training passed, most have a price so anything is possible but suspect I might be to optimistic!

They already have with the accepted deal.

Jamie2k9

GM228 wrote: »

They already have with the accepted deal.

I didn't think it was compulsory, good news all the same.

GM228

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I didn't think it was compulsory, good news all the same.

Under the accepted deal mentoring is compulsory if they have sufficient volunteers, if not then they will pick at random enough drivers who unless without good reason must mentor, I don't think a simple "I don't want to do it and that's that" will fall into the good reason category. In effect the deal makes mentoring compulsory.

Colonel Claptrap

Sitting on a DART yesterday, I heard a young shakey voice on the driver's cab tanoy announcing the next stop.

Turns out it was one of the new trainee drivers with his mentor showing him the ropes.

Delighted to see fresh blood in the company. Best of luck to the chap in his new career. He was very polite and courteous.

Thankfully this unfortunate episode of industrial relations has come to an end and young drivers can finally get going on their careers.

Lord Glentoran

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

Sitting on a DART yesterday, I heard a young shakey voice on the driver's cab tanoy announcing the next stop.

Turns out it was one of the new trainee drivers with his mentor showing him the ropes.

Delighted to see fresh blood in the company. Best of luck to the chap in his new career. He was very polite and courteous.

Thankfully this unfortunate episode of industrial relations has come to an end and young drivers can finally get going on their careers.

After last night’s news, where the NBRU painted the whole of Irish Rail as a no-go area, one wonders what their game plan is. Closure and Compo?

end of the road

Lord Glentoran wrote: »

After last night’s news, where the NBRU painted the whole of Irish Rail as a no-go area, one wonders what their game plan is. Closure and Compo?

wouldn't think so, i'd say their game plan is to have the problem of anti-social behaviour on irish rail dealt with. i have been lucky not to experience it myself, but there does seem to be quite the problem with it and it can't go on. it's driving away users and making other users feel unsafe and making them to possibly consider other options.